DINABANDHU SATPATHY Vs. GOPINATH KAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants brought a suit for declaration that they have acquired permanent sikmi tenancy under defendants 1 to 4 in respect of the suit land measuring 1-20 acres in current settlement records bearing a jama of Rs. 6-3, and that defendants 1 to 4 have got no right to obtain khas possession of the land and the settlement entry of the current settlement record of rights recording that the disputed lands are khas dakhali lands of the defendants is erroneous. The defendants resisted the suit alleging that after the death of Natha Satpathy one of the ancestors of the plaintiffs, who held the lands on bhag, the plaintiff have got no possession of it either as bhag tenants or in any tenancy right.

(2.) Both the Courts below have found that the disputed lands have been in possession of the plaintiffs and their predecessors-in-interest for a very very long time, and that it is not the khas dakhali land of the defendants.

(3.) The learned trial Court found that the plaintiffs had a permanent tenancy right as sikmi tenants. The learned lower appellate Court reversed that part of his finding and held that the plaintiffs were mere sikmi tenants without any right of permanency. Both the Courts below also differed as to their interpretation of Exts. 1 and 2 which are two compromise petitions filed between the parties or their predecessors-in-interest in some previous suits in which there are recitals with regard to the nature of tenancy right of the plaintiffs. The trial Court held that the recitals amounted to a mere acknowledgement of a pre-existing permanent right, while the learned Subordinate Judge in appeal took the view that the recitals amounted to creating a permanent right, and, as they were not registered documents, they cannot be taken in evidence in proof of the plaintiffs permanent tenancy right.